Detailed Action
This is the first office action on the merits for US application number 18/768,520.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species b), of Figs. 2A-3B, in the reply filed on January 20, 2026 is acknowledged, which indicated that claims 1-17 read on the elected species. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
As to claim 4, the limitation of each compressible finger of the plurality of compressible fingers comprises two or more grooves does not read on the elected species one groove. Further, each compressible finger of the plurality of compressible fingers comprises two or more groove are described only in paragraphs 68 and 69 as shown only in Figs. 4 and 5A-5B, i.e. non-elected species c) and d). Therefore, claim 4 does not read on the elected species.
As to claim 8, the limitation of one or more screw-head cable anchors each comprising a screw portion comprising inter alia threads does not read on the elected species comprising one groove. Further, one or more screw-head cable anchors each comprising a screw portion comprising inter alia threads are described only in paragraph 69 as shown only in Figs. 5A and 5B, i.e. non-elected d). Therefore, claim 8 does not read on the elected species.
Claims 9-13 depend from claim 8 and subsequently does not read on the elected species.
Accordingly, claims 4 and 8-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on January 20, 2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “the cerclage cable anchor is configured to be inserted into both threaded and non-threaded bone plate apertures” of claim 7 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1 and 14 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 line 7 should read “is configured to be inserted into and received by one of the plurality of bone plate apertures”.
Claim 14 line 7 should read “is configured to be inserted into and received by one of the plurality of bone plate apertures”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Applicant is advised that should claim 6 be found allowable, claim 14 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, and 14-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are unclear with regards to “a bone plate comprising a plurality of bone plate apertures thereupon” in line 2 and how apertures, i.e. holes, can be reasonably considered to be “upon” a plate or “on that matter” (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/thereupon) and the intended effect on the scope of the claim, as such appears to broaden the recitation of the plate comprising the apertures. Examiner is interpreting this as referring to, and suggests amending as, “a bone plate comprising a plurality of bone plate apertures
Claim(s) 1 is/are unclear with regards to “one terminal end of the one or more cerclage cables” in lines 9 and if this is intended to refer to the one or more cerclage cables that has two terminal ends in line 8 or if the disclosed cerclage cable is intended to have at least three terminal ends total and where such is supported by the specification and drawings. Claim 1 line 10 is also unclear with regards to support in the specification and drawings for at least one cable anchor aperture that is in addition to the at least one cable anchor aperture of line 5 for the elected species. Examiner is interpreting this as referring to, and suggests amending as, “and one terminal end of the two terminal ends is passed through the at least one cable anchor aperture.”.
Claim(s) 3 is/are unclear with regards to “each compressible finger of the plurality of compressible fingers comprises a single groove” in lines 2-3 relative to the groove of each finger of claim 1 line 5 and the intended effect of claiming that there is a single groove in addition to a groove or if the single groove is intended to further limit over the claimed groove. Examiner is interpreting this as intended to recite a total of one groove per finger as shown for the elected species and suggests amending to clarify.
Claim(s) 5 is/are unclear with regards to “each compressible finger of the plurality of compressible fingers are biased inwards when pressed through a bone plate aperture” in lines 1-2 and the intended interpretation of bias as such does not appear to be defined in the specification but is either being used contrary to the ordinary meaning of the term or the disclosed anchor would not be retained with the disclose aperture. That is, if the finger were biased or favoring an inward position, then the fingers would not expand outwardly when inserted into the aperture to grip the shoulder. This is further unclear as to how the anchoring is maintained if the groove releases the shoulder. Examiner is interpreting this as referring to, and suggests amending as, “each compressible finger of the plurality of compressible fingers are of the plurality of bone plate apertures and the groove catches
Claim(s) 6 is/are unclear with regards to the terminal ends of the cerclage cable in line 2 and if such is intended to refer to the two terminal ends of claim 1 line 8 or the one terminal end of claim 1 line 9 or some combination thereof. Examiner is interpreting this as referring to, and suggests amending as, “and one terminal end of the two terminal ends is passed through the at least one cable anchor aperture.” in claim 1 lines 9-10 and “the lumens are configured to receive the two terminal ends of the one or more cerclage cables” in claim 6 line 2.
Claim(s) 14 is/are unclear with regards to “a bone plate comprising a plurality of bone plate apertures thereupon” in line 2 and how apertures, i.e. holes, can be reasonably considered to be “upon” a plate or “on that matter” (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/thereupon) and the intended effect on the scope of the claim, as such appears to broaden the recitation of the plate comprising the apertures. Examiner is interpreting this as referring to, and suggests amending as, “a bone plate comprising a plurality of bone plate apertures
Claim(s) 14 is/are unclear with regards to “one terminal end of the one or more cerclage cables” in lines 9 and if this is intended to refer to the one or more cerclage cables that has two terminal ends in line 8 or if the disclosed cerclage cable is intended to have at least three terminal ends total and where such is supported by the specification and drawings. Claim 14 line 10 is also unclear with regards to support in the specification and drawings for at least one securing device aperture that is in addition to the at least one cable anchor aperture of line 5 for the elected species. Examiner is interpreting this as referring to, and suggests amending as, “and one terminal end of the two terminal ends is passed through the at least one cable anchor aperture;”.
Claim(s) 14 is/are unclear with regards to the terminal ends of the cerclage cable in lines 11-12 and if such is intended to refer to the two terminal ends of line 8 or the one terminal end of line 9 or some combination thereof. Examiner is interpreting this as referring to, and suggests amending as, “and one terminal end of the two terminal ends is passed through the at least one cable anchor aperture;” in lines 9-10 and “the lumens are configured to receive the two terminal ends of the one or more cerclage cables” in lines 11-2.
Claim(s) 15 is/are unclear with regards to “the bone plate comprises a plurality of bone plate apertures thereupon” in line 2 and how apertures, i.e. holes, can be reasonably considered to be “upon” a plate or “on that matter” (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/thereupon) and the intended effect on the scope of the claim, as such appears to broaden the recitation of the plate comprising the apertures. Examiner is interpreting this as referring to, and suggests amending as, “the bone plate comprises a plurality of bone plate apertures
Claim(s) 15 is/are unclear with regards to “at least one terminal end of the cerclage cable” in line 10 and if this is intended to refer to the cerclage cable that has two terminal ends in lines 9-10 or if the disclosed cerclage cable is intended to have at least three terminal ends total and where such is supported by the specification and drawings. Examiner is interpreting this as referring to, and suggests amending as, “passing at least one terminal end of the two terminal ends through the at least one cable anchor aperture;”.
Claim(s) 2, 6, 7, 16, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, for its/their dependence on one or more rejected base claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s)1-3, 5, and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fisher et al. (US 2009/0287215, hereinafter “Fisher”).
As to claim 1, Fisher discloses a cerclage cable system (Figs. 1, 7, and 8, ¶31; where ¶31 discloses use of cable anchor 64 with plate 12 of Fig. 1) comprising: a bone plate (12, Fig. 1, ¶31; where ¶31 discloses use of cable anchor 64 with plate 12 of Fig. 1) comprising a plurality of bone plate apertures (24s), wherein the bone plate is capable of being affixed to a bone (Fig. 1); one or more cable anchors (64) comprising a body (Figs. 7 and 8) comprising a proximal end (see illustration of Fig. 8, Figs. 7 and 8) and a distal end (see illustration of Fig. 8, Figs. 7 and 8), wherein at least one cable anchor aperture (74) is disposed toward the proximal end (as defined, Figs. 7 and 8), wherein the distal end of the cable anchor comprises a plurality of compressible fingers (682) each comprising a groove (see illustration of Fig. 8, Figs. 7 and 8) and is capable of being inserted into and received by one of the plurality of bone plate apertures (Figs. 1, 7, and 8, ¶31); and one or more cerclage cables (14, Fig. 1) comprising two terminal ends (Fig. 1), wherein the one or more cerclage cables are wrapped around the bone (Fig. 1), and one terminal end of the two terminal ends is passed through the at least one cable anchor aperture (Fig. 1, ¶s 30-32).
As to claim 2, Fisher discloses that the groove of each compressible finger is oriented perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of its respective compressible finger (see illustration of Fig. 8, Figs. 7 and 8).
As to claim 3, Fisher discloses that each compressible finger of the plurality of compressible fingers comprises a single groove (see illustration of Fig. 8, Figs. 7 and 8).
As to claim 5, Fisher discloses that each compressible finger of the plurality of compressible fingers are pressed through a bone plate aperture of the plurality of bone plate apertures and the groove catches on a shoulder portion (“catch” of ¶31, ¶31) of the bone plate aperture (Figs. 1, 7, and 8, ¶30 discloses depression 72 for pressing the anchor into the aperture, ¶31 discloses that the plate is not threaded but used a catch mechanism).
As to claim 7, Fisher discloses that the cerclage cable anchor is capable of being inserted into both threaded and non-threaded bone plate apertures (due to the structure shown in Figs. 7 and 8, ¶31 discloses 64 secured to a non-threaded bone plate via a catch mechanism and discloses that 64 may be positioned in grooves defined by threading in an alternate bone plate embodiment).
PNG
media_image1.png
428
879
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 6 and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fisher et al. (US 2009/0287215, hereinafter “Fisher”) in view of Huebner et al. (US 6,017,347, hereinafter “Huebner”).
As to claim 6, Fisher discloses the invention of claim 1 as well as a surgical connector (18) comprising two lumens (Fig. 1), wherein the lumens are capable of receiving the two terminal ends of the one or more cerclage cables (Fig. 1, ¶18).
Fisher is silent to surgical connector being a crimp and the lumens being parallel.
Huebner teaches a similar surgical connector (200) capable of use for receiving two terminal ends (Fig. 20) of a cerclage cable (Fig. 20), wherein the surgical connector is a crimp (col. 4 lines 39-43) comprising two parallel lumens (Figs. 16-19, col. 4 lines 34- 35), wherein the lumens are capable of receiving the two terminal ends of the one or more cerclage cables (Fig. 20); and securing the two terminal ends of the one or more cerclage cables with the crimp by deforming the crimp with a crimp tool (21, tool of col. 4 lines 18-21, Figs. 3, 4, and 20, col. 4 lines 37-43).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify the surgical connector and its two lumens as disclosed by Fisher to be a crimp with two parallel lumens and a crimp tool as taught by Huebner in order to secure a cerclage cable (Huebner col. 1 lines 51) by deforming the crimp toward a recess to interlockingly engage the cerclage cable (Huebner col. 1 lines 45-47), i.e. to provide a known alternate surgical connector for a cerclage cable.
As to claim 14, Fisher discloses a cerclage cable system (Figs. 1, 7, and 8, ¶31; where ¶31 discloses use of cable anchor 64 with plate 12 of Fig. 1) comprising: a bone plate (12, Fig. 1, ¶31; where ¶31 discloses use of cable anchor 64 with plate 12 of Fig. 1) comprising a plurality of bone plate apertures (24s), wherein the bone plate is capable of being affixed to a bone (Fig. 1); one or more cable anchors (64) comprising a body (Figs. 7 and 8) comprising a proximal end (see illustration of Fig. 8, Figs. 7 and 8) and a distal end (see illustration of Fig. 8, Figs. 7 and 8), wherein at least one cable anchor aperture (74) is disposed toward the proximal end (as defined, Figs. 7 and 8), wherein the distal end of the cable anchor comprises a plurality of compressible fingers (682) each comprising a groove (see illustration of Fig. 8, Figs. 7 and 8) and is capable of being inserted into and received by one of the plurality of bone plate apertures (Figs. 1, 7, and 8, ¶31); one or more cerclage cables (14, Fig. 1) comprising two terminal ends (Fig. 1), wherein the one or more cerclage cables are wrapped around the bone (Fig. 1), and one terminal end of the two terminal ends is passed through the at least one cable anchor aperture (Fig. 1, ¶s 30-32); and a surgical connector (18) comprising two lumens (Fig. 1), wherein the lumens are capable of receiving the two terminal ends of the one or more cerclage cables (Fig. 1, ¶18).
Fisher is silent to surgical connector being a crimp and the lumens being parallel.
Huebner teaches a similar surgical connector (200) capable of use for receiving two terminal ends (Fig. 20) of a cerclage cable (Fig. 20), wherein the surgical connector is a crimp (col. 4 lines 39-43) comprising two parallel lumens (Figs. 16-19, col. 4 lines 34- 35), wherein the lumens are capable of receiving the two terminal ends of the one or more cerclage cables (Fig. 20); and securing the two terminal ends of the one or more cerclage cables with the crimp by deforming the crimp with a crimp tool (21, tool of col. 4 lines 18-21, Figs. 3, 4, and 20, col. 4 lines 37-43).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify the surgical connector and its two lumens as disclosed by Fisher to be a crimp with two parallel lumens and a crimp tool as taught by Huebner in order to secure a cerclage cable (Huebner col. 1 lines 51) by deforming the crimp toward a recess to interlockingly engage the cerclage cable (Huebner col. 1 lines 45-47), i.e. to provide a known alternate surgical connector for a cerclage cable.
As to claims 15 and 16, Fisher discloses a method (Figs. 1, 7, and 8, ¶31; where ¶31 discloses use of cable anchor 64 with plate 12 of Fig. 1) comprising: positioning a bone plate (12, Fig. 1, ¶31; where ¶31 discloses use of cable anchor 64 with plate 12 of Fig. 1) over a bone (20) having a fracture (22, Fig. 1, ¶17), wherein the bone plate comprises a plurality of bone plate apertures (24s); inserting a cable anchor (64) comprising a body (Figs. 7 and 8) comprising a proximal end (see illustration of Fig. 8, Figs. 7 and 8) and a distal end (see illustration of Fig. 8, Figs. 7 and 8), wherein at least one cable anchor aperture (74) is disposed toward the proximal end (as defined, Figs. 7 and 8), and the distal end of the cable anchor comprises a plurality of compressible fingers (682) each comprising a groove (see illustration of Fig. 8, Figs. 7 and 8) and is capable of being inserted into and received by one of the plurality of bone plate apertures (Figs. 1, 7, and 8, ¶31); wrapping a cerclage cable (14, Fig. 1) around the bone (Fig. 1, ¶17), wherein the cerclage cable comprises two terminal ends (Fig. 1); passing at least one terminal end of the two terminal ends through the at least one cable anchor aperture (Fig. 1, ¶s 30-32); and securing the two terminal ends of the cerclage cable with a surgical connector (18, Fig. 1, ¶18), wherein the surgical connector comprises two lumens (Fig. 1), wherein the lumens capable of receiving the terminal ends of the cerclage cable (Fig. 1, ¶18). As to claim 16, Fisher discloses tightening the cerclage cable with a tensioner (Fig. 1 shows the cable tensioned, ¶17 discloses that the bone plate is secured to the bone, i.e. has been sufficiently tensioned by a tensioner).
Fisher is silent to surgical connector being a crimp and the lumens being parallel.
Huebner teaches a similar surgical method (Fig. 20) comprising: wrapping a cerclage cable (14) around the bone (shown in Fig. 5 for a similar embodiment), wherein the cerclage cable comprises two terminal ends (Fig. 20); and securing the two terminal ends of the cerclage cable with a surgical connector (200) that is a crimp (200, Fig. 20, col. 4 lines 39-43), wherein the crimp comprises two parallel lumens (Figs. 16-19, col. 4 lines 34- 35), wherein the lumens are capable of receiving the terminal ends of the cerclage cable (Fig. 20), and securing the two terminal ends of the cerclage cable with the crimp by deforming the crimp with a crimp tool (21, tool of col. 4 lines 18-21, Figs. 3, 4, and 20, col. 4 lines 37-43).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify the surgical connector and its two lumens as disclosed by Fisher to be a crimp with two parallel lumens and a crimp tool as taught by Huebner in order to secure a cerclage cable (Huebner col. 1 lines 51) by deforming the crimp toward a recess to interlockingly engage the cerclage cable (Huebner col. 1 lines 45-47), i.e. to provide a known alternate surgical connector for a cerclage cable.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fisher and Huebner in view of Gephart (US 2016/0331431).
As to claim 17, the combination of Fisher and Huebner discloses the invention of claim 16 as well as deforming the crimp with a crimp tool (21, tool of col. 4 lines 18-21, Figs. 3, 4, and 39, col. 4 lines 37-43).
The combination of Fisher and Huebner is silent to cutting excess portions of the cerclage cable with a flush cutter.
Gephart teaches a similar method (Figs. 1-16) comprising: positioning a bone plate (20) over a bone having a fracture (14, Fig. 1), wherein the bone plate comprises a plurality of bone plate apertures (30, 32, 44, Fig. 1, ¶s 93 and 95); wrapping a cerclage cable (22, 24) around the bone (Fig. 1), wherein the cerclage cable comprises two terminal ends (Fig. 1); and securing the two terminal ends of the cerclage cable with a crimp (40, 41, Figs. 1 and 14, ¶s107 and 108); further comprising tightening the cerclage cable with a tensioner (122, Fig. 13, ¶s 106 and 107); further comprising cutting excess portions of the cerclage cable with a flush cutter (170, Fig. 15, ¶108).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to specify that the method as disclosed by the combination of Fischer and Huebner includes tightening the cerclage cable with a tensioner as taught by Gephart in order to tighten the cerclage cable around the bone and draw the bone plate against the bone and seat the bone plate securely against the bone (Gephart ¶106). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify the method as disclosed by the combination of Fischer and Huebner to include cutting excess portions of the cerclage cable with a flush cutter as taught by Gephart in order to cut the cerclage cable end portion flush with a surface (Gephart ¶108) to predictably remove any excess length of cerclage cable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMY R SIPP whose telephone number is (313)446-6553. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Thurs 6-4.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice or telephone the Examiner.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kevin Truong can be reached on (571)272-4705. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AMY R SIPP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3775